posted at 5:15 pm on July 31, 2011 by Allahpundit

“This deal trades peoples’ livelihoods for the votes of a few unappeasable right-wing radicals, and I will not support it. Progressives have been organizing for months to oppose any scheme that cuts Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security, and it now seems clear that even these bedrock pillars of the American success story are on the chopping block. Even if this deal were not as bad as it is, this would be enough for me to fight against its passage…

Republicans have succeeded in imposing their vision of a country without real economic hope. Their message has no public appeal, and Democrats have had every opportunity to stand firm in the face of their irrational demands. Progressives have been rallying support for the successful government programs that have meant health and economic security to generations of our people. Today we, and everyone we have worked to speak for and fight for, were thrown under the bus. We have made our bottom line clear for months: a final deal must strike a balance between cuts and revenue, and must not put all the burden on the working people of this country. This deal fails those tests and many more.

The Democratic Party, no less than the Republican Party, is at a very serious crossroads at this moment. For decades Democrats have stood for a capable, meaningful government – a government that works for the people, not just the powerful, and that represents everyone fairly and equally. This deal weakens the Democratic Party as badly as it weakens the country. We have given much and received nothing in return. The lesson today is that Republicans can hold their breath long enough to get what they want. While I believe the country will not reward them for this in the long run, the damage has already been done.

His proposed solutions? Either a clean debt-ceiling hike, which will do nothing to check the growth of spending that’ll eventually utterly destroy that “capable, meaningful government” he loves so much, or the Fourteenth Amendment option, which would add a constitutional crisis and total fiscal uncertainty to the country’s current basket of political goodies. Even so, it’s awfully nice of him to toss this grenade and complicate the Democrats’ messaging in case Boehner can’t get enough Republicans to push the deal through the House. Fun fact about the Congressional Progressive Caucus: It’s the largest on the left with fully 75 members, which means if they vote as a bloc tomorrow then Pelosi and Hoyer are already down to fewer than 120 Democrats who might be willing to help Obama out by voting with Boehner.

As for the GOP’s remaining core objection to the deal, it’s a byproduct of the progressives’ core demand highlighted above:

Defenders of the plan will say that the defense cuts may never come about, or that if the committee makes some cuts but not enough, only the remainder would be subject to a 50-50 sequestration. This is no small consolation to House and Senate pro-defense lawmakers who fear that the committee won’t do its job and that draconian defense cuts will follow.

Why would Republicans give so much on defense? An adviser close to the talks says: “This is the only thing Democrats are getting. It was more important than taxes.” If so, and national defense cuts are now a “get” for the Democratic Party regardless of our national security needs, this is shameful. And if Republican negotiators give in, then the Democrats are going to have to come up with lots and lots of votes to make sure the bill passes both houses.

According to HuffPo’s Sam Stein, all Democratic leaders had signed off on the deal as of 4:30 p.m. ET, which I guess means Pelosi thinks she really can deliver “lots and lots of votes.” She had better: Fox News’s Chad Pergram says he’s already hearing from conservative/tea party House members that they can’t support this deal either, which means Boehner will need a broad centrist coalition to get things done.

Stand by for updates, as usual.

Update: Reid’s office says he’s onboard, provided that the caucus approves the package. Bernie Sanders replies by calling it “grotesquely immoral” and “bad economic policy.” And here’s something fun from Chuck Todd: “The holdup on announcing the deal appears to be uncertainty of how House gets to 216.”

Republicans favorable to the deal feel as though they have three safeguards against the committee recommending tax increases and Congress going along: 1) The members appointed by Boehner and McConnell, who will presumably not be Gang of 6 types (McConnell would be wise to appoint Kyl, Sessions, and Toomey); 2) a tax increase would not get through the House and probably not have 50 votes in the Senate; 3) the baseline dynamic mentioned earlier.

That doesn’t solve the problem with heavy defense cuts in the trigger, but presumably the GOP thinks it can undo those with separate legislation before the cuts kick in.

Update: A GOP side explains to James Pethokoukis why it’ll be so hard for the Super Commission to try to raise taxes:

It has an undefined mandate of deficit reduction but the way that is constructed would essentially make it impossible to raise taxes. Anything scored by CBO is based on current law. Current law assumes that taxes are going to go up by three-and-a-half trillion dollars next year [over ten years]. So anything you do to the tax code, unless it starts off with a $3.5 trillion tax increase, it’s going to be adding to the deficit … It’s almost impossible for them to touch taxes because if they do, almost anything will be scored as a tax cut, making it that much more difficult to reach the $1.5 trillion that they need to get to.

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

His proposed solutions? Either a clean debt-ceiling hike, which will do nothing to check the growth of spending that’ll eventually utterly destroy that “capable, meaningful government” he loves so much, or the Fourteenth Amendment option, which would add a constitutional crisis and total fiscal uncertainty to the country’s current basket of political goodies.

The Left often loves to destroy whatever they’re members of. Unions, for example, have ruined their own industries (from GM to US Steel) by their greed.

1) As is always the case, the cuts are over ten years, and the spending increases are immediate.
2) The plan allows the President to raise the debt ceiling, even though Congress wont approve of a debt ceiling increase.
3) The BBA language is toothless as it will be sacrificed for the other two trigger options.
4) The underlying baseline will be current law which will see the Bush tax cuts expire, which means we will all actually see trillions in tax increases.

Where exactly did the GOP win in this? I’m not asking this rhetorically, I really want to know the GOP case for voting for this?

Oddly enough, the very same message has been going out to every Republican who will listen; “This is not just going to decide whether or not you get endorsed for re-election by the Republican Party. This will decide whether there WILL BE a Republican Party to endorse you!”
The truth we confront now is that a failure to live up to the victory of 2010 will make the party itself a meaningless charade so obvious that nobody will bother to even show up for 2012.

I still think the House should remove the trigger that says: “If the super-committee cannot agree on tax reform for the second installment of $1.5 trillion dollars, then across the board cuts will be implemented” and replace it with a trigger that states: “If the super-committee cannot agree on tax reform for the second installment of $1.5 trillion dollars, then the bipartisan CCB plan that’s been tabled will become law.” That will more than cover the $1.5 trillion to match the debt increase, while offering a more substantial “across the board” spending cut measure. Boehner would have no problem passing the bill with that added to it, as most of the GOP would sign on, and that would force Reid to either reject the plan and default, or accept it and send it to the President. How can we lose in that scenario?

We are in big trouble with these idiots we have running this country! So will the ones who crossed over earlier still vote for this swill of a bill after they gave been played?

bluemarlin on July 31, 2011 at 5:31 PM

I meant will the Freshmen who got played to advance in this in the first place still vote for this? I hope they realize what they have done and and what was done to them and at least some of them get pissed!

You will have to ask Ed Morrissey, the staff of NRO, Larry Kudlow and the rest of the “hey, it’s the best deal we could get” crowd.

We have given Osama Obama all the spending money he wants, for the greater glory of MEChA, the Black Panthers, ACORN, the unions, and the rest of the handout-demanding crowd. Not to mention all the lamebrain “initiatives” the Traitor-in-Chief and his power-besotted wife can dream up. Not to mention endless foreign aid to countries that despise us, terrorists, and Islamic “freedom” movements seeking to replace hateful-but-relatively-harmless regimes (Egypt and Libya) with a new breed of fundamentalist enemies.

We have also guaranteed the Chicago Jesus’s reelection.

Great deal, huh?

I say: shut the damned government down and do it fast before they destroy us. Non can be trusted if they have not stood against this disaster.

Oddly enough, the very same message has been going out to every Republican who will listen; “This is not just going to decide whether or not you get endorsed for re-election by the Republican Party. This will decide whether there WILL BE a Republican Party to endorse you!”
The truth we confront now is that a failure to live up to the victory of 2010 will make the party itself a meaningless charade so obvious that nobody will bother to even show up for 2012.

Lew on July 31, 2011 at 5:31 PM

Well I think they have already blown that by pissing off the whole conservative base and probably a lot of independents as well. They will get this done in the dark of night again by the slimmest of margins and tell us we won somehow. They will not take that message seriously but they should!

The proposed cuts to defense are worse than the arguments made against the BBA. I don’t get why Republicans are agreeing to it. The only thing I see is that cuts focused on defense will be an outrage and so will never be allowed to happen. Hello increased taxes. The only bright spot is that will only be for a short time and will motivate conservatives in 2012.

They want this to fail, they want the chaos that will follow, no matter what the needs are Obama will shut down what will affect the most Americans and the Media will make sure the tea party republicans get the blame. Obama is counting on being able to pull a Clinton for 2012. QE 1 and 2 will cause inflation, the failure of this deal will allow the Democrats to blame it on the Republicans. They need these talks to fail, they want these talks to fail, they want to climb atop top the rubble and point to us (the tea party)

That’s all true, AP, however with the Bush tax cuts going away, all the tax increases that Obama sought last year will go into effect. That’s still a net increase in taxes. IN FACT, some over at NRO is using the tax increase baked into the baseline when the tax cuts expire as a safeguard to the super-committee raising taxes on top of that. The idea that tax increase are a safeguard against further tax increases doesn’t really feel like a win for private property and economic freedom.

I’m not worried about the super committee, I’m angry about the questionably constitutional clause of giving the president the power to raise the debt limit and giving him power to “veto” (If you can call it that, more like a reverse veto)

The point of the majority in the House is not to stop things: it is to not START THEM.

All spending starts in the House. Boehner said last year he wanted the old style of budgeting Department by Department, Agency by Agency and not the slushfund pool system that developed over the last 40 years. He then went back on that. It is perfectly sane to hold each part of the government accountable for their spending separately, and was the way things were done up to the 1960’s. When you pool parts of government together it becomes ever-so-convenient to just slosh money from agency to agency without having to go through Congress.

The House can and should do piecemeal budgeting, prioritize those parts of government that are absolutely necessary FIRST and then see how much money is left for the other parts. By not starting the process you don’t have to stop anything. And government agencies all have shutdown rules and regulations that cover this.

It is not what is stopped it is what is not started that is vital. You don’t have problems if you don’t cause them in the first place.

Too bad Mr. Boehner doesn’t want to do that.

That is part of the meaning in ‘stop the spending’: don’t start it in the first place.

I’m not worried about the super committee, I’m angry about the questionably constitutional clause of giving the president the power to raise the debt limit and giving him power to “veto” (If you can call it that, more like a reverse veto)

clement on July 31, 2011 at 5:56 PM

THIS has been the plan all along. They are trying to invoke the 14th amendment to do this. THIS is a way around the invoke…..

Has anyone taken these guys into a corner and explained to them what happens if they actually win? I can’t think of the disaster that would take place, in this country, if the Democrat Progressives had their way about everything. We might as well normalize relations with Cuba because there wouldn’t be an ounce worth of difference between us, except we have a lot further to go down to get to their level.

Then expect to give Obama another 4 years and lose the House is you stay home.

Jesse on July 31, 2011 at 5:37 PM

Who said anything about staying home? What I’m telling you is that the Republican Party is on the verge of going the way of the Whigs! For the first time in a very long time, there is a growing and vital alternative readily available and if the Republicans don’t wake up and smell the competition, we’re going to get wasted.
We’ve already squeezed out a boatload of so-called “Moderates” and now we can’t even exist without the Conservatives. We either get with that program or we’re dead!

Well the precious metals markets think a deal is going to happen. Gold is down over 1% or $17.00. Price is $1,614.00 per ounce. Buy the dip, if you can, because it wont last. After all 2.5 trillion in fiat currency/debt isn’t bearish for gold in the long run!

Weight of Glory on July 31, 2011 at 6:30 PM

Exactly what I’ve told my friends and family. I’ve bought gold (and silver) for many years, not as an investment at all, but insurance. Before Obamacare and the Porkulous bills, my average weighted cost in gold was around $400/oz. Since then, I’ve accumulated a good deal more, so that average is around $850/oz.

Since I believe that unless and until conservatives control both houses of Congress and the Presidency, note I did not say Republicans, even at current days prices, gold (and silver) will continue to rise in value against the dollar. If, for some reason, that trifecta can’t be attained, gold (and silver) will go parabolic.

It’s simple math: the more dollars they have to print, the less their value, and you can’t just print gold (or silver). Where gold will go over the next year and a half, no one really knows, but it’s not going to tank.

Hogwash buddy, these “bedrock pillars of the American success story” that you refer to are driving this poor sick Republic into the third world sewer. If you want to keep your seat you need to find some other kinds of “free stuff” for your parasitic constituents.

Chucky Todd says there are still enough votes to probably pass it in the House. Progs are furious about the trigger.
That’s good. We’re all nervous about the trigger. Better to get it done then instead of pulling that darned thing when the time comes.

I’m disgusted that you even gave Grijalva the time of day. I live in Tucson and I am sick of this dishonest BIG government socialist. He won reelection through lies and deceit. A staff member of his was found with election signs from his opponent in his vehicle. He was pulling them up and disposing of them. There were other things of this sleazy nature that occured. Was he investigated? Of course not!. This joker does not belong anywhere near the levers of power.

I call upon these hardline, hostage-taking ideological fanatics to compromise for the good of America.

Ah, they did compromise back in Dec 10 2010. Part of the compromise was not to raise taxes on ANYONE for 2 years!
Republicans HAVE kept their word.

The Agreement made through compromising had the Republicans agreeing to
Extend Unemployment insurance 13 months.
Extends ARRA or ‘the Stimulus’
Extend reduction in the FICA payroll tax,

That was what the Republicans agreed to through “compromise”

The Democrats agreed to through “compromise” not to raise taxes on ANYONE for 2 years!
Why are the Dem’s trying to renege on their promise?
What is the point of an agreement through “compromise” if one party has no intention of keeping their end of the bargain?

What possible reason do the Republicans have to agree to any “compromise” with the Democrats?
More important, Trillions of dollars are sitting on the sidelines, not being invested, not creating private sector jobs, why?

Because No one trust this President (and he’s the leader) to keep his word.

The drum roll to raise taxes began anew 23 hours after all parties agreed not to raise taxes, oddly enough this tends to make people think this President, and in this case the Democrats, had no intention of keeping their word.

Progressives have been organizing for months to oppose any scheme that cuts Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security, and it now seems clear that even these bedrock pillars of the American success story are on the chopping block.

I think they need to apoint a “super computer” to decide the cuts. Just program it with “no defense cuts” and “no tax increases” and it will make the cuts. And since it never gets elected, it’s safe. Do I hear an amen?

Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are certainly NOT “bedrock pillars of the American success story.” All 3 programs are broke. Social Security is a laughable ponsey scheme. Medicare has so skewed the health care market over the years, causing the cost of health care to sky rocket. It costs billions more than what was originally projected. Medicaid is no better and both are rife with waste, fraud and abuse. It will take generations to undo the sick government dependency these programs have created. These programs are a symbol of how a once great country has now become a nation of benefactors of government largesse and handouts.

If this is the actual position the Republican House has put us in then welcome to a third party. Independent’s will not allow this now small minority of progressives dictate any longer to a majority regardless of the media that the beltway needs to know is past their prime as well. It’s a whole new world and there is no longer room for those who continue to use the inside of our collective tent as a toilet, they just don’t know any better and we have just allowed them to make this kind of deal? A deal Romney even says he wouldn’t have voted for? I guess the beltway just didn’t hear us during the midterms. No problem, the very able new majority has folks lined up ten deep to take these seats and we will.

On another economic note: After the Dow futures jumped to a 170 point projected gain on the euphoria of a debt ceiling deal, the economic news of the day has resulted instead in a Dow plummet of another 125 points.